Generator

A torque diagram is a shear diagram about a different axis

Rendered here at the parameters it defaults to, with every essay that calls it — which is the same list as the blast radius of changing it.
A torque diagram is a shear diagram about a different axis. A torque of 40 kNm applied 2 m along a member of 6 m held against twist at both ends. The two ends take 26.7 and 13.3 kNm, in inverse proportion to their distances, because the two halves are springs in parallel and torsional stiffness is GJ over length. The diagram steps at the applied torque and closes at the far end, exactly as a shear diagram does — the only difference is which axis the arrows turn about.

A torque diagram is a shear diagram about a different axis. A torque of 40 kNm applied 2 m along a member of 6 m held against twist at both ends. The two ends take 26.7 and 13.3 kNm, in inverse proportion to their distances, because the two halves are springs in parallel and torsional stiffness is GJ over length. The diagram steps at the applied torque and closes at the far end, exactly as a shear diagram does — the only difference is which axis the arrows turn about.

6 essays call torsion-path. The drawing above is what it returns with no arguments at all; every call below passes it something, because a placement that passes nothing draws whichever member of the family the generator happens to default to rather than the one its essay argues about.

Where it is called

Changing this generator changes every one of these figures.

A torque diagram is a shear diagram about a different axis. A torque of 40 kNm applied 2 m along a member of 6 m held against twist at both ends. The two ends take 26.7 and 13.3 kNm, in inverse proportion to their distances, because the two halves are springs in parallel and torsional stiffness is GJ over length. The diagram steps at the applied torque and closes at the far end, exactly as a shear diagram does — the only difference is which axis the arrows turn about. Internal forces

The internal force with no diagram

A cut through a member reveals four things, and this collection has drawn diagrams for three of them. The fourth is a torque, it obeys exactly the same rules, and whether it exists at all can depend on a decision the designer is free to make.

The flanges go opposite ways, and the pair of them is the bimoment. A 305 by 165 mm I-section held against warping and twisted by 0.5 kN·m, with the section on the left and the two flanges seen in plan on the right. At the built-in end each flange bends in its own plane, one way at the top and the other at the bottom, through 29.3 mm at the free end — drawn 20 times its true size against the 6 m length. The pair of flange shears is 1.69 kN each, and 1.69 × 295 mm is 0.500 kN·m — the whole torque at that section, carried by two forces neither of which is a torque. The pair of flange moments is 3.04 kN·m each, and 3.04 × 295 mm is 0.897 kN·m², which is the bimoment. It puts 67.0 N/mm² into two diagonally opposite flange tips and takes the same out of the other two, so its net force and its net moment about every axis are zero — which is exactly why no member diagram has a place for it. Sections and stress

The section that cannot stay flat

Twist an I-section and its cross-section dishes out of its own plane. Stop that happening at one end and the member finds a second way to resist — the flanges bend in opposite directions — and the stress resultant that describes it has units nothing else in statics has.

One of these two curves is a stiffness and the other is a statement of statics. The torque a spandrel beam carries, against how much of its torsional stiffness is left. The rising curve is compatibility torsion — a floor beam framing into the side of the spandrel, which shares its fixed-end moment of 197 kNm between the spandrel's torsional stiffness and its own flexural one. Uncracked, the spandrel takes 51% of it, or 100 kNm; at a quarter of that stiffness it takes 21%, or 41 kNm, and the floor beam picks up what was shed. The flat line is equilibrium torsion — a canopy cantilevering 2.2 m off the same spandrel, whose 116 kNm is fixed by statics and contains no stiffness at all. The first can be designed away by accepting a rotation. The second cannot be designed away by anything. Internal forces

The torsion that goes away if you let it

A spandrel beam attracts a torque in proportion to its own torsional stiffness. Crack it and the stiffness falls by a factor of four, the torque falls with it, and nothing has failed — because the floor beam it was competing with picks up exactly what was shed. A canopy hung off the same spandrel is a different animal entirely.

The corner is where the plate twists, and it has to be held down. The twisting moment M_xy over a 6 × 6 m simply-supported panel under 10 kN/m², from Navier's double series. It is zero along both centrelines and largest at the corners, which is the opposite of the bending moments and is why no strip reading contains it: 31% of the load crosses this panel in twist, and a strip can only bend. At a free corner the twisting moment is statically equivalent to a downward point force of 2M_xy — 26.7 kN here, 7.4% of the whole load on the panel, applied at a point — so the corner has to be held down. A panel whose corners are free lifts there, deflects more, and cracks diagonally across them. The deflection at the centre is 2.53 mm, against 4.05 mm for the strip that ignores all this — 60% more, which is the size of what the twist is carrying. Deflection

A third of the load crosses sideways

A slab spanning both ways is usually explained as two beams sharing a load by a fourth power, and the explanation is not merely approximate — it is missing a mechanism. A real plate carries load three ways, and the third one has no beam strip in it: it is twisting, it accounts for a third of the load on a square panel, and it is why the corners lift.

The deformation with no limit against it. A 8 m open section carrying 12 kN/m at an eccentricity of 75 mm from its shear centre. The torque is small — 900 Nmm per mm — and the twist is not: 2.55° at mid-span with the ends restrained against warping, against 9.09° if they are not, a factor of 3.57. What that angle does is move the flange tip sideways by 8.9 mm — 62 per cent of the member's own vertical deflection, and 28 per cent of the span/250 that vertical deflection is checked against. The same load on a closed section of the same depth moves it 0.15 mm, 60 times less. No code gives a limit for this quantity, so it is the one movement in the collection that is computed only after somebody has complained about it. Deflection

The movement with no limit against it

Every code in the world gives a deflection limit. None gives a twist limit — and a beam loaded off its shear centre twists. On an open section a modest eccentricity moves the flange tip sideways by three fifths of the sag that does get checked, and nothing anywhere says whether that is acceptable.

A deck holds the middle of the span. The twist along an 8 m open section on forks, free to warp, carrying 12 kN/m at 75 mm from its shear centre — 900 Nmm of torque per mm of span. With nothing fastened to it the beam twists 6.25° at mid-span; a deck resisting the top flange's rotation at 5.0 kNm per metre per radian holds it to 4.20°, and one four times as stiff to 2.10°. The deck works where the beam is weakest, in the middle; near the supports the beam's own torsional stiffness does most of the work whatever is fastened to it. Deflection

A deck is a spring, not a wall

An open-section beam loaded off its shear centre twists, and the usual reassurance is that the deck fastened to its top flange will stop it. The deck resists the flange's rotation with a stiffness per metre of span, and that stiffness has to be compared with the beam's own. On an 8 m beam a screwed deck of ordinary stiffness removes a third of the twist; on a 16 m beam the same deck removes three quarters, because the beam's torsional stiffness falls with the square of its span and the deck's does not.

The library, page 6 of 7 — where torsion-path sits